<?xml version="1.0" standalone="yes"?>
<Paper uid="C96-2147">
  <Title>Zero Pronoun Resolution in Japanese Discourse Based on Centering Theory</Title>
  <Section position="3" start_page="0" end_page="0" type="intro">
    <SectionTitle>
1 Introduction
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> lilt many n~tural languages, (~lemenls that (:a.n be easily deduc(;d by tim reader ~r(~ frequently omit(;ed front the. CXln'essions in discourso.s. Pmdc.ula.rly in Jal)mms('. discourses, this omission o(:(;ms IltOl'C fi'eqllelt|;ly &amp;ltd a ZClO pr()IlOllll is of|;O.ll llsed to avoid rel)(;ating ~ iiOllll t)hrasc thai; al)tmar(~d in 1;he previous S(Htt, CltC(kS. A ZCl'O I)l'()II()llll C}tll l)(t (xmsidei'cd as a noun \[)hra.se which is of an obligatory case and which is not (:xprossed but (:~m 1)o. und(:rstood through tim c(ntt(~xt(Yoshimoto, 1!)86). Thox(,.fore, 1;o un(h~rsl;m,t a ,\]al)mms('~ dis(:oursc, it is imt)ol'l;mfl; to identify (;h('. mtL(me(lelfl;s of zoa'o pronouns.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="1"> l{,(;ccntly thor( ~. have t)(~cn ~t lllllnl)(;r of works (;ha.t mo(lcl tim (zca'o) pronoun rt!solution with Chc (;on('x~.t)(, calh:d '(;()itl;('.r'(Grosz (.q; a,l., 11995; Ih'cnnan el; al., 1!)87; -Walker et al., 1994; Kamo.ymna., I !)86). ~I'Ilc CO, Ill;(Willp~ I;h(',ory Lr'ios l;() iden(;i(y die ;tAI|;(X',(',(1Oll|, of ;t (zero) i)rollOtllt l)y tim i(te~ t;llm; |;lw. ondl;y |;hal; a, S(~IltO, ll(;e ItlOS(; centrally con(:(!rns(ctmi;(:r) (;ends (;o 1)(: (;Xl)rCss(:d by a (zt:r()) pronoun. Tim (:entering t;hoory has tit(: following adwmtagcs. Because it uses only the mlrftu:(', information in sent(races and does not n(:cd a huge amount of common sense knowledge to rcsolvo (zero) pronouns, it is easy to implem(:nt i|; on computer syst(:ms. Secondly, it; cmt bc appli(:d to many languages(Grosz (:1; al., 1995; Walk(!r (!t al., \] 994).</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="2"> hi spite of l;h(~se ndv;mt~gcs, unt'ortunat('.ly, the usefithmss of tim previous centering flmneworks has not flllly tc'stcd lmCmlSC only a small number of construcl,ed discourses have b(;cn usc.d for cv~fluation. ~)~ think they should bc I;osi;o.d with ~t corpus of naturally occurring discourses. How(WOI', Stlch &amp; |;(~S|; is II()W difficult becaus(~ the t)I'Cvious (:(mt, caing theory has only handled the t)tw-ItOtltOdtgL ilt Sll(;CC,qSivo. simph', stHltCllt;O,q and has ltOL ad(;quatdy addr(~,ss(~d the way to handh; c.omt)h~x ,SCttI, CIIC(tS |~\[liLt &amp;I'C l)t(.w~JenL it( na|;Ul'a\]\]y (/(;(:tlrring (lis(:ours(:s.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="3"> lit this p~rt)('.r, w(; t)rcsc.n() a met;hod |;o hm&gt; die comt)lex so.n|;(,.nc(;s with tim (;C.lfl;(~ring |;h(!ory and do.scribo, our Kmnework that identities tit(', a.nt;(?ccd()it|;s of Z(.Wtl IIi'(lllOllltS in naturally occurring .\]aImnes(~ discourses. We also prcs(ml; |;ht! ewJua(ion of our fi'mncwork with re~fl discourso.s.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="4"> \]tl so(;t;i()n (;wo wc Oll(;\]itto, |;WO versiolls of (;he c(;n(;o.ring theory |;trot; have bccn al)plit~d to ,Ja.tla.llO.,&lt;-;c zero 1)l'OllOlllt r(!sohti;iolt, lit sectiou |;}lro(~ wo. exp1;fin how zero \[)l'()lt()lllIS in (;omp\[ex sen\[,O.1IC(~S (;tilt bC h~mdled bas('d on (;\]m CtHtl;Cl'ilI~ th(&gt; ory. In sc('.l;ion f()m wc (hm(:ribe a st% of the experiments that our zero pronoun rcs(flution method in s('~t:tion (;hre(~ is a.ppli('d i;o 1.'clJ ,\]ii.1)mt(;s(,. disCOllI'SCS. null</Paragraph>
  </Section>
class="xml-element"></Paper>